More of Stephanie's greatest hits...

Yet another column that got me in BIG trouble on campus...And yes. I went there. You'll know what I mean when you read the column.

On slave reparations
Originally published March 7, 2002

Reparations. Few words make my blood boil like this one does. The very thought of something so vile and disgusting as reparations for something I didn’t like in the first place just makes me angry.

The idea of reparations has been bandied about for a while now, and I’m convinced that the reason nothing has been done is because it’s a such bad idea. Why? Oh dear, let me count the ways.

There are a myriad of logistical and logical problems to deal with. The logistics include why, how, who, and how much, and the logic involves the seeming lack thereof in the fact that these demands are being made in the first place.

Why, why, why, why, why?!?!?! I don’t like slavery. I think it’s a horrible, nasty, and morally repugnant institution, and I’m glad someone did away with it before I came into being because I just don’t have the time and energy to devote to the abolitionist movement.

There isn’t a soul who was alive during the Civil War living now, and there isn’t a soul living now who owned slaves or was a slave. With the possible exception of Strom Thurmond (who may very well have been alive during the Civil War), I don’t think anyone in this country would even fathom the idea that slavery is, was, or ever will be a good thing.

So why in God’s name should I apologize for something I didn’t do and don’t agree with? Furthermore, depending on how the powers that be plan to carry out this brilliant proposal, this could put me out some money that I really don’t have.

How exactly do blacks think they should be paid for the horrible injustice that got them to a country where they can publicly disagree with the government, not get caught in the middle of a nasty and violent civil war, and perhaps live past the age of 30?

Should all non-black people pull out their checkbooks and write a check to the “We want your money for something you don’t like” fund? That would surely go over like a lead balloon.

Then there’s the idea of giving blacks tax credits or exempting them from paying taxes altogether. If this is the way it goes, fine, but blacks better be prepared to give up a lot.

If they aren’t paying taxes, they shouldn’t be afforded any of the services that tax money pays for. We’ll neglect their roads, not pick up their trash, make them send their kids to private schools, and take away any hope of blacks getting scholarships to public colleges.

I hope there isn’t much violence in their neighborhoods, because the police, whose salaries they wouldn’t be helping pay, would be under no obligation to serve and protect those areas. No, that probably isn’t a good idea either.

I know! We’ll just have Uncle Sam cut a check to every black in the country. Of course, this too, would take money away from federal, state, and local programs that are beneficial to everyone, including blacks. So, maybe not.

This one’s for all the true cynics out there. We’ll all pitch in and buy any black who really feels like they’d rather go back to Africa a plane ticket to the Congo or Chad, where they surely won’t last a week.

Who should get reparations and who shouldn’t? Does there have to be proof of ancestors who were enslaved? What about people who may be the product of an interracial marriage? Does the presence of white, Asian, or Hispanic blood make a person ineligible to receive reparations?

What about the blacks who owned slaves? Yeah, that’s right. Blacks owned slaves too. Should the descendents of those people get some money too? All of these are questions to which I have seen no answers.

Furthermore, how much should people receive? Trying to put a dollar amount on a person’s suffering has always seemed a problematic idea to me. The value of life is cheapened the minute someone tries to put a monetary figure on it. Do you really want to do that to dear old Great-great Grandpa Joe?

What good are reparations going to do, exactly? Please, someone feel free to let me in on the secret, because I fail to see the logic to this absurd argument. Yes, slavery was a horrible institution, and the suffering of slaves was certainly great.

But it wasn’t my fault!! And insisting that I should somehow provide restitution for it will only cause a greater split between blacks and whites in America than already exists.

I believe that good can come from bad. Yes, your ancestors may have had to endure the degradation of slavery, but because they came to this country, you have been blessed with infinitely more opportunities to survive and thrive. Maybe I should apologize for that too.

God Gave Me a Brain and a Big Mouth, or: The Feminism of Stephanie

I called my parents tonight and spent some time on the phone with my father (a very important detail, as you will soon see). He informed me that he had found something online that I should read, but warned me that it might make my blood boil. That something was a post on Wade Burleson’s blog (note: Wade Burleson DOES NOT make my blood boil, FYI). I’ll let you, gentle readers, take in the meat of what Rev. Burleson was discussing. I wish to take my own thoughts in a different direction—what it means to be a strong, independent, Christian woman.

One of the people referenced in this blog entry of Rev. Burleson’s is Doug Phillips of Vision Forum. Phillips’ “vision” is one of “Biblical” patriarchy—and I use the term “Biblical” very, very loosely. Simply put, Phillips believes that men are the head of the woman in marriage in every way. Here is a synopsis of what Phillips thinks and what I think about his views (or in some cases, how I would obviously be a heretic to him).

1. Women are called by God to serve their patriarchs (fathers) until married when they will then serve their husbands.

· If you were to ask my father (the very same who suggested that all of this nonsense would make my blood boil), I think you would find that he feels his job as a parent was to equip me with the tools (morals, education, etc.) to be a successful, intelligent, productive member of society. Once that was done, he and my mother (from whom I learned much about not taking crap off of anyone…SINNER!!) kicked me out of the nest, confident that I could make my own way in the world. Translation: I, in my condo in Waco, TX, am the head of my household. Okay, that’s a lie. My cat, Sassy (also female…once *GASP*) is the head of the household, but I’m the one who pays the bills. My father is no longer my head. I’m not sure he ever REALLY was. You see, my parents raised me to be an independent thinker. I need neither their permission nor their forgiveness to act on my own behalf. I alone am responsible for my actions. That does not stop me from asking them for advice, nor does it mean that I don’t want their approval of my choices in life. I just don’t believe it is necessary for me, a 25 year-old woman, to ask mommy and daddy for permission to…I don’t know, go to Egypt for a year, maybe.

2. Women are not to speak in a church setting, but are to ask their husbands any questions they may have and remain silent in the presence of men.

· First of all, you all must realize that until recently, the church I am a member of was the largest Baptist congregation with a female senior pastor. Now, granted, I started attending Calvary Baptist Church after Julie Pennington-Russell left to pastor First Baptist, Decatur, GA, but the church she left behind is as spiritually vibrant and alive with the love of Christ as any church I have ever darkened the door of, and she was largely responsible for that. Secondly, while I could speak at length about context in Biblical passages (I know, I know, context is a four-letter-word to fundamentalists like Phillips), I won’t because that’s not my area of expertise. I will say however, that the first creation account in Genesis (6-days, etc.) states that God created male and female at the same time. Furthermore, before painting Paul a misogynist, one might want to consider the problems of temple prostitutes, fertility cults, and early Gnostics which the churches in Corinth and Ephesus had to contend with at the time Paul was writing to those churches—and to Timothy. Also keep in mind the pattern of the Pauline epistles: where there was too much freedom, Paul preached restraint (Corinth and Ephesus), and where there was too much legalism, Paul preached freedom (Galatia). Context…right next to Godliness….

3. Women are not to work outside the home for any income, but are to be housewives and homemakers within the home.

· Shall I expound upon my belief about women and work…and everything else for that matter? Of course, I shall. It’s my blog, after all. Here it is: God blessed me with a brain and a big mouth. If he didn’t want me to use either, he would have blessed me with neither. How am I respecting the blessings God has bestowed upon me by placing them under a bushel basket, rather than letting them shine for all the world to see? I have been blessed with intellect, passion, and opportunity to pursue my life’s ambitions. Should I just turn my back on those blessings, thumb my nose at God and say, “No thanks?” I don’t think so. My parents taught me that. They also taught me that I have an obligation to share what I know about Islam (yes, a heretic AND an infidel. God have mercy on my soul) with others so as to clear up stereotypes. This leads us nicely to…

4. Women are never to teach a man anything, but are to learn from men in a quiet and submissive spirit.

· Let me be blunt (yeah, I know. Like I haven’t been blunt thus far). I know more about Islam, specifically Islamism and jihadism than a very large portion of Americans. I study this stuff. It’s my life’s work. I can quote Sayyid Qutb, Osama bin Laden, and a whole host of other interesting characters. I can explain how Egyptian Arab Socialism gave rise to the popularity of the Muslim Brotherhood and its more radical offshoots. I can give a timeline of the formation of al Qaeda from the Afghan jihad to the present. This is important information. And if people ask (not just women, men too), then I have an obligation to explain what’s going on in the world to those who ask in a way that is accessible and as fair and balanced as I can make it. That means I teach men plenty. And I’m completely unrepentant about it.

5. Women cannot have communion unless given to them by their husband or, in the case of an absent husband, an elder from a 'normative' family or, in rare cases, a mother can be served be her son if he (the son) is old enough to walk and carry the host and is present in worship with her.

· Well, considering that we took communion this morning at Calvary Baptist Church (intinction, by the way), and not only did I take it for myself, but I received communion from two women, we’ll just walk away from this one.

6. Women are to cover their heads as a sign of their 'submission' to their husbands and to God.

· It should be noted that this is not a tenet of Phillips’ theology, but Bruce Ware, a professor at the Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville. And it’s a stupid, stupid thing to argue about. Just as it is in Islam. If you want to, do it. If not, don’t. End of story.

7. Women are not to attend a university or any institution of higher learning for the purpose of pursuing a career.

· Another one I’ll walk away from. I’m currently sitting in my office where two degrees from institutions of higher learning are proudly displayed while studying for my PhD.

8. Women are not to vote, but are to let their husbands speak for them.

· On the contrary, my parents (especially my mother…that crazy sinner) have told me repeatedly that should I choose to shirk my duty as a responsible citizen, I also forfeit my privilege to complain about the outcome.

9. Women are never, for any reason, to use birth control.

· You know, it’s funny. I always thought that a woman’s choice to use birth control was between her doctor and her…husbands also count, just not for me because I’m still single. You see, my doctor and I decided that because my menstrual cramps were downright incapacitating, the Pill was the way to go. And reading this is the first my father knows of that decision. Know why? Because it’s none of his business. Well, and also because he doesn’t really want to know. Ignorance is bliss for my dad when it comes to female problems. See? Didn’t consult him. Don’t care what his opinion is (no offense, Dad). When a man has to deal with the multitude of reasons a woman can choose to use birth control, then he may comment. If the woman is his wife, he may comment, but ultimately, the decision is the woman’s in consultation with her doctor, especially if the Pill is being used for medical purposes and not contraceptive purposes.

Correction: It has come to my attention that my father did, indeed, know about my female problems. Nevertheless, that does not change the fact that the decision to start on the Pill was none of his business and he wasn't consulted.

10. Women are to respond to abuse in a quiet, gentle and submissive spirit.

· Okay, ladies, listen up. Abuse is about power. Submission to power only exacerbates the problem. Abuse should not be dealt with quietly or submissively. As for gently, let me say that should a man abuse you physically, you should insert your knee gently into his groin until he cries like a baby. Then you should kick him to the curb. Should a man abuse you emotionally or mentally, you should tell him that he is NOT allowed to talk to you that way, then gently tell him not to let the door hit him in the butt on the way out the door. See? Nothing quiet or submissive about that.

Stephanie’s Special Comment: True Support for Our Troops

I remember distinctly what I was doing when the war in Iraq started. My mother and I were coming back from North Carolina where we spent Spring Break visiting family and checking out colleges. Upon deplaning in Atlanta on our way back to Oklahoma, we were bombarded by images on the CNN Airport Network of “Shock and Awe,” which had begun in earnest in Iraq. I could only shake my head at what I saw as the senseless nature of this war. I still think this war was unnecessary and has irrevocably harmed our national interests and compromised national security. But that is not the reason behind this special comment. This special comment is the result of all of the bullshit we’ve heard about supporting our troops and how the people spouting it have failed miserably to do so.

The costs exacted by this war have been extreme. At present, almost $5 trillion has been spent on the war in Iraq. But more importantly than that is the human cost: over 4,000 American deaths, between 35,000 and 53,000 injuries, depending on whose count one chooses (the military doesn’t count injuries that don’t require air transport to a military hospital), close to 400 amputations as a result of IEDs. The military has gotten too good at saving the lives of its soldiers, it seems. Forward operating hospitals and the technological advances of miniaturization of medical equipment, as well as better body armor, have led to a survival rate of over 90% for injuries suffered in Iraq and Afghanistan. But even the best body armor can’t protect against traumatic brain injuries, which plague many veterans whose bodies had to deal with the concussive blast of IED explosions.

And those who have been lucky enough to come back in one piece and with their brains unscrambled have a different kind of problem. The Montgomery GI Bill, which was last updated 20 years ago, only pays approximately half of the cost of the average college tuition, making it difficult for soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan to afford college. And the benefits are even less for reservists and National Guardsmen, who have constituted up to 60% of the troops in Iraq at some points. Over 80% of all reservists and National Guardsmen have been deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, and 20% of those have been deployed more than once. While a decent proportion of these “weekend” warriors have attended college and now have jobs, there are still plenty who could reap the benefits of the GI Bill, assuming it was actually beneficial to them.

One of the first things Jim Webb (D-VA) did upon being sworn in as a United States Senator was introduce the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act (S. 22), co-sponsored by Chuck Hagel (R-NE), Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), and John Warner (R-VA), all of whom, including Webb, were recipients of GI Bill benefits. Despite the bi-partisan support the bill enjoys from former members of the armed forces, only half of this country’s senators and a quarter of congressman have endorsed the measure.

Here’s what S. 22 does: It guarantees that the federal government would pay the highest in-state tuition rate to public institutions plus books and fees, as well as providing a cost-of-living allowance. It would also increase benefits to Guardsmen and reservists and create a matching funds program with private colleges that chose to participate.

Notably absent from the list of senators supporting the measure is John McCain, who has said in the past that the bill seemed like a good idea, but has yet to speak out in favor of it. I realize the man’s running for president and everything, but Hillary and Barack both support the measure, so there’s no excuse for McCain not to say something nice about the bill.

But more importantly, officials in the Bush administration oppose the measure, calling it a “retention-killer.” They apparently fear that if soldiers are given an easier time getting an education, they’ll be less likely to want to put up with crappy pay, endless deployments, and the world’s most dangerous working conditions. Even still, these are the same assholes who have been telling us all that our troops need our support for the last five years. I agree. But apparently, my opinion of supporting the troops and the Bush administration’s are far different. Seems to me that supporting the troops cannot end with the right equipment, the right weapons, and the right body armor on the battlefield (none of which, by the way, this administration has felt the need to supply the troops with anyhow, but I digress). Supporting the troops must also mean taking whatever measures necessary to help them readjust to civilian life, including helping them get a college education without amassing huge amounts of debt. Doesn’t their service, their sacrifice, their willingness to put themselves in harm’s way mean anything? Shouldn’t these men and women be afforded the full benefits of the GI bill as the Greatest Generation was after World War II?

Then there are those who suggest that the estimated $2 billion a year it would require to fund this measure is too expensive. You gotta be bloody kidding me! We’ve spent $5 trillion on this war! The health care costs for the 90% of injured soldiers who have survived their injuries could climb into the hundreds of billions of dollars over their lifetimes. And we’re going to get uppity about $2 billion?!? This country has got to pull its head out of its ass and realize that this war and the men and women who fight it are our responsibility. And not just the ones who have died, not just the ones who have been injured, but all of them. They are all our responsibility. We owe it to these men and women to help them in any way we can, including paying for their college education. The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America have a list of those senators who support S. 22 and the representatives who back the corresponding House resolution. If your senator or representative is not listed, call them, e-mail them, annoy the hell out of them, anything to get their attention. Tell them you support the troops in every way.